Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755014AbXFPSTX (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:19:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752296AbXFPSTQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:19:16 -0400 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:40677 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751482AbXFPSTP (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:19:15 -0400 Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 19:19:02 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: Bernd Schmidt , Alan Cox , Ingo Molnar , Daniel Hazelton , Linus Torvalds , Greg KH , debian developer , david@lang.hm, Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Message-ID: <20070616181902.GB21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> References: <20070614195517.GA4933@elte.hu> <20070614235004.GA14952@elte.hu> <20070615011012.6c09066e@the-village.bc.nu> <20070615012623.GA25189@elte.hu> <20070615101007.0cbfd078@the-village.bc.nu> <4673CA7C.5040207@t-online.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2291 Lines: 45 On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 01:57:59PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jun 16, 2007, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > > Alexandre Oliva wrote: > >> On Jun 15, 2007, Alan Cox wrote: > >> > >>> What this means for the FSF goals if Tivo get up one morning and switch > >>> their system firmware to ROM however is interesting 8) > >> > >> I'm not the FSF, and I don't speak for it, but it seems to me that > >> this would be "mission accomplished". > > > This is insane. You start with a lofty ideal involving "freedom", and > > when you end up with a meaningless technicality (and in technical terms > > a change for the worse) you consider it a victory? > > It accomplishes the mission in that everyone is on the same grounds. > Same freedom for everyone. If the vendor tries to keep a privilege > over the software to itself, denying it to its customers, it's failing > to comply with the spirit of the license. It's really this simple. > Is this so hard to understand? > > The goal is not to push vendors away from GPLed software. If they > can't permit modification of the software, that's fine, they can still > accomplish this. > > What they can't do is deny it to customers while they retain it to > themselves. This is unfair, this is wrong, and this disrespects > users' freedoms. Therefore, the GPL should not permit it. How the hell does that improve the situation for users? Alexandre, please realize that you are preaching to non-believers. I realize that you have accepted the FSF credo, but if you want that conversation to go anywhere you have to separate the things you believe in from the things you can rationally explain. Apologetics of your variety is not going to cut it. _Can_ you separate the things relying on your beliefs from the things that can stand on their own? If you can't do that, please stop wasting everyone's time and bandwidth. It's a secular maillist; what any of us might happen to believe in is personal and frankly, none of your damn business. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/